| From: | The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shiby Thomas <sthomas(at)cise(dot)ufl(dot)edu> |
| Cc: | "Vadim B(dot) Mikheev" <vadim(at)sable(dot)krasnoyarsk(dot)su>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Execution time. |
| Date: | 1998-02-04 16:38:04 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.NEB.3.95.980204113746.24451W-100000@hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 4 Feb 1998, Shiby Thomas wrote:
>
> => > I invoked postmaster as:
> => > postmaster -B 30000 -o "-s -F -S 16384"
> => ^^^^^
> => 240M of shared memory ?!
> =>
> Is the size of the hash bucket dependent on the number of buffers available ?
> If so, with -B 30000, it might create huge hash buckets and hence the
> hash join could degenerate to a nested loops join. Is that possible -- just
> checking. What could be good values for -B and -S. The largest table I am
> joining is about 60M
My production server runs with a -B 256, and a -S 10240
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 1998-02-04 16:45:29 | Best problem report *I've* ever seen ... NAWT!! |
| Previous Message | Shiby Thomas | 1998-02-04 16:26:11 | Re: [HACKERS] Execution time. |